washingtonpost.com The Fog of WMD By Peter D. Feaver Wednesday, January 28, 2004; Page A21
<snip>
If the current Kay exit interview had been available in March 2003, it's unlikely that the administration would have pressed for war. But since the war case rested on multiple pillars -- dealing with a problem now before it became an unmanageable problem later, recognizing that Hussein could not be trusted in the long run, recognizing that the war on terrorists involved getting tough on the causes of terrorism (stunted political development in the Middle East), recognizing that the status quo policy on Iraq was responsible for creating the conditions that gave rise to al Qaeda in the first place -- it is possible that reasonable people would have still advocated war.
=========================================================================
This is good. I like this fellow Feaver (an apt name it seems), he has a healthy sense of fun about him. He must have smiled like a kid eating his first ice cream cone as he created that wordy labyrinth.
He inspires me to try my hand at aburdist, WMD related comedy:
Recognizing that kittens have whiskers, recognizing that whiskers resemble the aluminum tubes Iraq might have used as part of centrifuges for the creation of nuclear weapons for Al Qaeda, recognizing that these weapons would have given terrorists the ability to rule the world, setting up their barbaric capital on the radioactive ruins of Washington -- it is possible that reasonable people would have advocated the elimination of kittens from the face of the earth (or at least, Middle Eastern kittens).
Everyone should try it. Wheeee!
DRM